Anyone in biglaw get a pay cut?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of changes, client? A lot of the inefficiency and wasted hours on tasks that really don’t need to be done in big law is client-driven. I’m in litigation.

That's what firms often say, but it isn't necessarily true. Firms often want to run down every potential rat hole to avoid allegations of malpractice.

Sorry, it’s BS to blame it all on the firms. In-house counsel is often the one trying to cover his ass with or pacify the business people. In-house counsel often makes us do things that we flat out say have an extremely low likelihood of benefit. If you want to blame it on the nature of litigation, go ahead, but that’s not the fault of law firms.

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

Right, no need to meh when you just agreed with me. Point is we are NOT doing this crap because we are afraid of malpractice suits. We’re just trying to keep this lovely PP happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of changes, client? A lot of the inefficiency and wasted hours on tasks that really don’t need to be done in big law is client-driven. I’m in litigation.

That's what firms often say, but it isn't necessarily true. Firms often want to run down every potential rat hole to avoid allegations of malpractice.

Sorry, it’s BS to blame it all on the firms. In-house counsel is often the one trying to cover his ass with or pacify the business people. In-house counsel often makes us do things that we flat out say have an extremely low likelihood of benefit. If you want to blame it on the nature of litigation, go ahead, but that’s not the fault of law firms.

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

Right, no need to meh when you just agreed with me. Point is we are NOT doing this crap because we are afraid of malpractice suits. We’re just trying to keep this lovely PP happy.

You seem pleasant. Also...I did not agree with you. The point is, you are paid to take the heat, so quit your complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of changes, client? A lot of the inefficiency and wasted hours on tasks that really don’t need to be done in big law is client-driven. I’m in litigation.

That's what firms often say, but it isn't necessarily true. Firms often want to run down every potential rat hole to avoid allegations of malpractice.

Sorry, it’s BS to blame it all on the firms. In-house counsel is often the one trying to cover his ass with or pacify the business people. In-house counsel often makes us do things that we flat out say have an extremely low likelihood of benefit. If you want to blame it on the nature of litigation, go ahead, but that’s not the fault of law firms.

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

Right, no need to meh when you just agreed with me. Point is we are NOT doing this crap because we are afraid of malpractice suits. We’re just trying to keep this lovely PP happy.

You seem pleasant. Also...I did not agree with you. The point is, you are paid to take the heat, so quit your complaining.

Did you read the post I was responding to? Try to keep up. I was correcting the record, not complaining. No surprise your reading and critical thinking skills suck. Guess that’s why you have to hire real lawyers.

[Anonymous]

OP here. no cuts yet at my firm, but they have to be coming. After today, I am more or less out of work to do and have been given stand-down orders from pretty much all the clients I work with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. no cuts yet at my firm, but they have to be coming. After today, I am more or less out of work to do and have been given stand-down orders from pretty much all the clients I work with.

What practice area?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

AARP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

AARP?

Air cover? That’s new name for it to me. But you waste your company’s money and you are a fool to pay big firm prices for litigation. Big waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

AARP?

Air cover? That’s new name for it to me. But you waste your company’s money and you are a fool to pay big firm prices for litigation. Big waste.

This is exactly what happens - we hired Cravath, it’s not my fault things didn’t work out (versus hiring some no-name, cheaper firm)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

AARP?

They get sued a lot.

[Anonymous]

Lotta big firm partners here, so I will re-up my request. Can you PLEASE allow incoming associates to defer for a year and work at a nonprofit for a fraction of the pay, like in 2009. I could really use one or two right now, unemployment claims are through the roof and evictions are going to skyrocket as soon as the courts reopen. I’ll give ‘em good trial experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lotta big firm partners here, so I will re-up my request. Can you PLEASE allow incoming associates to defer for a year and work at a nonprofit for a fraction of the pay, like in 2009. I could really use one or two right now, unemployment claims are through the roof and evictions are going to skyrocket as soon as the courts reopen. I’ll give ‘em good trial experience.

No.

[Anonymous]

But did we ever find out what a coffee attendant does? Takes orders from partners and associates? Delivers to their office from break room?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But did we ever find out what a coffee attendant does? Takes orders from partners and associates? Delivers to their office from break room?

Makes sure the K-cups and creamers are plentiful and varied?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meh, I'm a GC. A big part of the reason I pay biglaw prices is for air cover. You give me and my execs the air cover I think is best.

AARP?

Air cover? That’s new name for it to me. But you waste your company’s money and you are a fool to pay big firm prices for litigation. Big waste.

This is exactly what happens - we hired Cravath, it’s not my fault things didn’t work out (versus hiring some no-name, cheaper firm)

And the seven figure legal bill follows the loss of the six figure dispute. And the case was primarily handled by an associate. It’s not smart for companies to use these big firms but I don’t see it changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Firm is doing great. Hopeful anecdote. Delayed distribution. Cuts to summer program. Hiring and lateral freeze. Considering reducing associate pay. Poor, poor outsourced staff. Get your hours in and your bills out. Firm is doing great.

Haha so true “we planned ahead and we are stable... but we are asking you to do certain things...”